Will a Lower Blood Alcohol Level for Drunk Driving Reduce Automobile Accidents

¶ … Federal Drug Association is studying to find out if people are getting prescription drugs that they do not actually need. A large number of doctors would like to see the American Medical Association ban prescription drug advertisements across all forms of media. A San Diego doctor, Dr.

David Priver, claims that it is "catastrophic in my office, with patients coming in and demanding a drug they saw on television." In sixty nine percent of the instances a patient asks a doctor for a prescription drug advertised on TV they will walk home with that drug, an FDA survey has found. (Calfee, John (2002) proposal was drafted in June 2001 by Dr.

Angelo Agro of the AMA's New Jersey delegation because he also feels that advertisements undermine doctors' credibility when physicians do not agree that the advertised drugs are the best choice for a patient that comes in and demands it saying, "the patient is at best incompletely informed and at worst...deluded." Proposed resolutions asked the AMA to petition the FDA to ban direct to consumer prescription drug ads to curb what many opinions believe to be interference from the pharmaceutical industry into the doctor patient relationship.

(Huang, Alison November, 2002) Drug companies that portray their drugs to substantially improve the lives of the afflicted individuals are not quick to stress the dangers and serious side effects that can endanger lives. The new drugs advertised have a twenty percent chance of ending in an FDA drug recall or having additional FDA safety warnings placed on their labels within 25 years. Advertisements account for hundreds of millions of dollars every year that drug companies spend.

Initially, the AMA opposed prescription drug advertisements but the current policy states that they are acceptable as long as they include a clear health message, refer patients to their doctors for more information, and do not encourage self-diagnosis and self-treatment. The National Medical Association found in April 2002 that advertisements do not live up to that. Manufacturers once only advertised prescription drugs to mainly doctors, but in 1997, the FDA loosened its drug promotion rules and advertising aimed at ordinary people tripled to nearly $2.5 billion a year.

From 1996-2000, the New England Journal of Medicine found that drug firms increased their spending on television advertising to consumers seven fold. (Kessler, D.A. 1990) Some people argue that direct-to-consumer promotion provides a service by increasing public awareness of medical conditions and encouraging educated communication between patients and providers. Furthermore, direct-to-consumer ads encourage consumers to act as independent decision-makers, able to weigh the benefits and risks of their health choices.

They believe that one of the reasons that there are not more of the drugs sold is because the public does not know there is a drug out there that can help them. At the same time, critics fear that drug companies will trade on the public's lack of medical knowledge to obscure products' risks and adverse effects. Physicians complain that they must devote increasing amounts of scarce time to dissuading patients from taking drugs that advertising has led them to believe are easy.

(Thoen, Eric 1998) When consumers watch the advertisements on television, it is almost like they are getting a free medical consultation for free. The advertisements give a list of symptoms that just about anyone in the world could have, then they explain how their drug help to fix the problem. One of the biggest advertisements is for the medications that children with an attention deficit disorder take. The drugs are things such as Ritalin and Conertra, which are mind-altering drugs to help control the brain waves of overly active children.

The advertisements ask the consumer if their children have certain problem, which is a list of about fifty things that all children have at least one of, and then tell the consumer that their child may need one of the drugs they are advertising. All the ads end with "ask your doctor for details." Another problem with the direct-to-consumer advertising on these drugs is false advertisement.

Many of the commercials say the drug will cure problems it is not even designed to do, and tell the consumer that they have far fewer side-effects than their competitors. In July of 2001, Representative Pete Stark of Washington D.C. introduced the "Fair Balance Prescription Drug Advertisement Act of 2001," a bill to deny tax deductions for unbalanced direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising that places more emphasis on product benefits and dramatically minimizes product risks.

He said that consumers need to have the right information before asking their physicians for a prescription drug. (Starks, Pete, 2001) The American Association of Retired Persons, AARP, believes that the advertisements are a good thing, however. They believe that it helps the consumers realize that there are alternative medications for them, and that it greatly benefits firms like Medicare and BlueCross- BlueShield. It believes the campaigns will help the public to get better prescriptions, and have been asking president bush and congress to provide the necessary funds.

John Rother, AARP's Director, wrote in the AARP Medical Journal "...but it is necessary for Congress to address these needs without further delay. This will require that members of AARP from all over the country make their voices heard." (Rother, John 2001) One of benefits to the direct-to-consumer advertisements is that is does let the public know that there might be a drug out there that can help them with specific problems such as depression, ADD, ADHD and other ailments.

However, they need to make sure that they put all of the possible side effects in the advertisements along with the positive aspects of the drugs. Doctors also need to do more.